Comments on: U.S. Eyes Israeli Tank Protection

By: WarScientist

WarScientist — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 10:48:04 +0000

This looks like a very promising piece of kit (assuming it works) which will not only increase surviveability of armoured vehicles, but also drastically reduce their weight, which will increase their speed, and thus protect them better against IEDs (one way of avoiding IEDs is to drive really really fast).

Having to throw less armour on the flanks frees up weight you can use to protect your vulnerable bottom-side of your vehicle.

As for collateral damage, i would much rather take my chances with an iron first exploding near me than an RPG detonating the ammo/fuel in the vehicle next to me.

Concerning Israeli product quality, i cant really say much about it since i havent used any of them. But they do have one major advantage. They actually produce and field this stuff. A lot of new american technologies suffer from cancilitis, where you spend millions upon millions of dollars in developing a product and then just before its ready to be fielded, the project gets scrapped.

By: Bronco46

Bronco46 — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 05:57:56 +0000

With regards to collateral damage; standing next to a tank or APC taking an RPG isn’t safe whether the projectile is coming or going. Infantry knows that vehicles are rocket magnets and try to stay their distance anyway.

By: xman

xman — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 06:18:03 +0000

hello guys. since i can speak from the isrealli side of the battle, i can tell you that the low tech is the hardest to create solution to. there is no defence against IDE from close range. unless you are in a tank with active armor protection. regarding the “stories” some of the comments attached to the israeli products , as one whos life was saved more than once (25 years of SF service and combat) i can say that like every solution there is no 100% and never be, but to change the ratio from 100% hit by projectile to 20% meaning to save 8 out of 10 tanks. its something. about stories? well how many american manufacturers where telling stories that had cost lifes? so relax guys we are on the same side of the coin , no distpute between us, and yes its ok to have proud on you country’s technology.
i wish to all men and women serving in all hard zones that other persons will never stop thinking and developing products that will save even some of them.
xman

By: Trophy

Trophy — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 11:03:02 +0000

Um… APS is meant to protect against high-velocity projectiles such as RPG’s, missiles, and possibly some high-caliber cannon munitions. Different passive and active countermeasures exist against IED’s, APS is not one of them.

By: roland

roland — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 08:27:42 +0000

I seen on the news 2 to 4 terrorist were throwing the russian made hand-throw IED to one of our lone striker driving on the urban area in Afghanistan at a very close range about 5 feet to 10 feet distance from the tank. I dont know if the Israeli Tank Protection can be that effective at that range and speed.

By: pennst98

pennst98 — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:04:53 +0000

No. I mean they have repeatedly built in problems to their devices and inserted codes into their software that they can activate later. Can’t say more.

While they do have a tendency for exagerattion (like the russians) for their capabilities, they do have some really brilliant weapons that we should be investigating. But as i said their past problems make it hard to transition some of their technology.

Oh, almost forgot don’t forget their propensity to sell technology regardless of ITAR regulations.…..

By: atacms

atacms — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:39:32 +0000

Pennst, what are you referring to by saying Israelis spoof their gear? Are you saying the tests are rigged?

By: atacms

atacms — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:38:06 +0000

Johnny, I thought that Textron was able to make the TRAPS work. The issue was that it would only work on RPG’s, not ATGM’s, let alone KE rounds.

By: pennst98

pennst98 — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 13:59:37 +0000

The real problem here is no whether they work or not, we’ve known for some time that they do in fact work. The REAL problem is that they’re Israeli companies, who are notorious for spoofing their gear. After numerous problems with procured equipment and software The DoD just doesn’t trust them.

The second issue is collateral damage. What do you do to protect the light infantry strolling along side the vehicle? Even several Israeli Generals have stated that while they like the technology they can’t risk losing an entire squad / platoon because someone shoots an RPG at a tank…..

The third issue is incompetence / corruption…..but then again what else is new?

By: Johnny

Johnny — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 12:25:36 +0000

Textron bought into a developmental system called TRAPS and proceeded to spend oogles of tax dollars to deliver nothing.